Another PDM works question

[jpjamo]

howdy all,

I have a conceptual problem with how to make PDMworks cope with the preferred designing method at the company I work for.

As background we mainly work on individual and descrete industrial design projects of a smallish size with usually less than 50-60 parts.

Firstly when an idea is generated the designers here start with a 'solid' of the overall shape of the product then break it up into a mulitibody part. So you might for example have a front and back half in the initial part. They then 'insert into new part' each of the solid bodies so that you have seperate part files. These seperate parts are usually then brought into an assembly. Following which the parts will be progressed through the design stages and any aditional parts will be created in the assembly (with references) as required.

When the parts are at the last stage before tooling, the parts are then again 'insert into new part' and any draft or fillets that are missing are added. The justification for this is that because of the way references have been used in the construction of multiple parts in the assembly, if you add draft to the actual part it may destroy a reference that was used to define another part.
If you 'insert new body' and effectively make a copy of the part you can add away without fear all the while maintaining all references.

So my question is how can I make PDMworks cope with that?

At a minimum there could be three seperate part files in the creation of one part. Should I give all versions of a part the same base number with a suffix to seperate the levels of part? (Not sure exactly how to do this in PDMW)

Or when I drag in the final assembly should I only give part numbers to the 'final' version of a part and ignore everything else?

Also what do you do with the original 'solid' part that effectively is the basis for all following parts?

Yours confused
James

 

[ctopher]

First, don't see PDMW as having parts, assy's & dwgs...see them as files. Each part that makes up your multibody part or assy, needs to be separate files. This makes it easier to track and control each file.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[PDMAdmin]

I agree with ctopher. The structure of your assembly in PDMWorks will be the same as it is in SolidWorks, so as long as all your filenames are unique, you should be okay.

 

[jpjamo]

Hiya,

thanks for quick replies. OK what you say makes sense and I know filenames will be unique but what about on check in when you're entering part numbers for every file that gets sucked into the vault due to a reference in the assembly?

Have a good weekend

Cheers
James

 

[Standing]

Both Chris and PDMAdmin are right.
I was not going to say anything, but this has been bothering all morning. I do not envy you at all. I know what I am about to say will not change your company’s style or do I wish too. Look at it this way. How easy would it be for a new hire, who knows SolidWorks very well, too change a diameter on a part deep into the assembly. Can two different people work on the same assembly but different parts? Just something to think about.


Bradley

 

[ctopher]

If a file is referenced, it goes into PDMW. It is linked to a part, assy or dwg in one way or another. If you do not check in the ref file (part), then check it out next time, the ref file will not be there. You will see "file not found" and/or mate errors. ALL files get checked in.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[jpjamo]

Bradley - it is definietly on the harder side to track down all the references when you want to make a change but there are some advantages in the design stages. The way I usually go about it is to select an inserted body and edit in context. Or alternatively build on top of whats existing if required ;-)

Chris I follow about all files being checked in - I have practised with drawings and such to see what kind of thing happens in PDMW - which parts though get part numbers?
Bradley's PDM rule 11 states - "that if it needs to be in PDM it should have a part number". This makes sense to me but do I then have to part number all the files that go into making the 'final' part file?

Thanks heaps again for your suggestions
James

 

[Cheeseburger]

James ...

I would go along with all the suggestions here, and add your own as well (see your original submission).

While I'm not a fan of this particular pratice (I usually like one model per part), I have been through your situation before and you must deal with the cards that have been dealt.

For example:

1234-5678-F (Finished Part)
1234-5678-D (Design stage)
1234-5678-I (Initial Part)
1234-5678-C (Concept)

Hope this helps ...

Cheers


Brian Mazejka
Designer/Documentation Coordinator
Microline, Inc.

 

[Standing]

James,
About rule number 11 in PDM rules to live by;
You can have a base number for an assembly called 123456.sldasm. For every part in that assembly can be called 123456-001.sldprt, 123456-002.sldprt. and etc.

We have parts in our PDM called part1.sldprt, part2.sldprt, up to part5.sldprt. Now, no one can create a part1.sldprt just to play with, because PDM will not give them write access in their own local working directory. The person who did this does not care and convincing management to change it is not worth it.

Bradley

 

[ctopher]

James,
All parts should have some type of part number, even epoxies, solder, etc. Everything should be listed to be easily tracked and maintained.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 05
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[jpjamo]

Thanks all for your input.

Am going to try to implement a trial of the suggestions as soon as I can get hold of a suitable project.

Thanks heaps
James

 

[RawheadRex]

I am probably not bringing much in the way of anything new to this discussion overall but do have some input which I think is at least relavent. So please pardon any perceived redundancy on my part.

To start off, I have to echo the comments of the other folks here. Any file that you have created which has direct bearing (in your case this means files with in-context, base part, or other such relations) on the final design files needs to go into PDM.

I have done my fair share of casting design where the rough casting is then machined to a final state. All of my feature relating to ONLY the casting reside in a single file which is uniquely identified with a part number define within the company's scheme that defines the item as a casting. For the machined component I open up a new file and create the first feature by selecting Insert, Part, and selecting the casting file in the file open dialog. There is now an in-context/external reference to the casting. Subsequently I then create all of the machining features and save the file using a different part number which designates the item as a machined component.

Now left with two files that essentially capture the state of a single component at two stages of defining design intent ask the question, do I only need to save the machined version because it most relevant to the end use? Well, it's pretty much a no-brainer in my case because I need to relate the requirements of my casting so that it can be procured. But the important point is that if I don't retain that information and only check-in the machined item then I potentially forsake the ability to effectively interogate any predecessor. This is assuming of course that the base model files are disposed of.

You detail a pretty deep level of definition in your initial post. I would think that you'd want to maintain that information "just in case." That is certainly what I would do in your position. So I agree with the suggestion to come up with a naming convention for your files which is appropriate to maintaining the full design-intent of your projects.

Regards,
Chris Gervais